Establish the DAO Development Team

DAO Development Team

I would like to introduce the DAO Development Team (DDT), its potential members, and operational specifics of the team that will hopefully take the DAO from Cocoon to Metamorphosis. The Aavegotchi DAO has discussed process improvements and potential leadership roles as solutions for many months. We have painstakingly devised an operational structure with five detailed roles and varied skill sets which we believe will add significant value to the DAO. In addition to the five salaried roles, we recommend four “at large” elected members from the community to serve as voting members of the DDT. Every member of the proposed DDT must be committed to transparency and decentralization which is imperative to the success of the protocol.

I am hopeful that this structure will allow our DAO to efficiently perform the following:

  • Develop and execute on a community-created DAO roadmap
  • Develop and publish key operational and finance metrics
  • Finalize construction of the DAO Mission and Vision
  • Streamline community grant applications and measure funded projects by implementing a decentralized project management tool such as Dework
  • Continue to innovate and develop the Aavegotchi protocol with expansions of the Forge
  • Increase protocol revenue and sustainability
  • Increase community participation and building with a transparent bounty process

These are the proposed roles with their respective applications detailing the role, responsibilities, vision, deliverables, and qualifications of the applicant. I have discussed the roles with each individual and structured the compensation according to their available time commitments, level expertise, and market value of skill set. I believe each role is necessary to take on the enormous task of fully transitioning our DAO from cocoon to oasis by the end of 2023. More importantly, I believe we need this structure to adequately engage the DAO to leverage its talents and efficiently compensate valuable community members throughout the transition.

DDT Chair – Dr Wagmi

DDT Operations and Finance Lead – MikeyJay

DDT Product Lead – Oliver Spoon

DDT Technical Lead - diddly

DDT Community Lead – Hefe

Budget and Cost

The total 6 month stipend request for the 5 roles 271,000 GHST. In addition to the five roles above, we recommend a 75,000 GHST budget for bounties and community grant applications. All GHST would come from the DAO Treasury and be distributed via the operational method below. The total budget request for this initiative is 346,000 GHST (7.4% of the treasury GHST). As a token of appreciation for the “at-large” members, they will receive a spacious parcel in the DAO district. Success for this project will mean many available bounties as we leverage community talent to build and add value to the protocol.

Operational Specifics:

The DDT will submit a list of approved transactions and payments to the DAO Foundation multisig every two weeks. This process takes full advantage of the legal protections of the DAO multisig and will be included as standard work for the paid members of the DAO Foundation multisig. The DDT will be responsible for reviewing and approving bounties and grants as well as communicating those votes to the DAO Foundation multisig and community every two weeks. The DDT will be responsible for promptly producing a community facing document or dashboard that clearly communicates the status of allotted funds. The DDT will be subject to the Standard Operating Procedures which will be updated to include reference to the DDT and submitted for Core Proposal.

At Large Members

The “At Large” members will serve to review grant applications and provide unique perspective and advice on DAO initiatives. They will be elected by a weighted vote as a unique signal proposal and serve a 6 month term as defined by the SOP. Ideally this group brings a broad skill set that is both complementary and provides accountability. These individuals represent the DAO and do not “work for” the Chair or Leads. As mentioned in a recent DAO post from The Gotchi FArmy, this is an ideal opportunity to incorporate guild voices who will be key in the success and future of the protocol.


We hope that our proven track record of commitment to this community and the protocol bolsters confidence in such a proposal. It is vital to actively seek and act on community feedback as we forge this space together. WIth Pixelcraft’s announcement of the 2023 Roadmap, it is clear that the Aavegotchi DAO will need to assist in execution of the transition from cocoon to metamorphosis and the final Oasis phase. Pixelcraft set an ambitious goal to complete this transition in 2023 which will be an enormous lift for all stakeholders. We appreciate the opportunity to take on this challenge, pioneer the space and evolve together.



Thank you for putting this together @stedari. The 2023 roadmap reveal from PixelCraft could not have been timed better with this post.

Looking forward to community feedback here and during the Sunday DAO call

These numbers seem way too high to me. They look like decent yearly salaries for a full time job.

I also found the Forge’s funding application lacking. They repeatedly failed to correctly estimate their expenses, and now many of the same people are supposed to “Streamline community grant applications”?


while i appreciate the importance of getting the right people in the right places to do the good work we all deserve. seems like the stipend total could be chopped in half and still be a generous amount of funds for working towards adding value to what I would assume to be meaningful holdings, often times part time outside of otherwise real world responsibilities.

Are these full time jobs or are they more oversight positions up for renewal? i think the distinction should be quite clear. Not to disrespectfully value your alls expertise or time, but seems to be a big spend in an otherwise uncertain market.


While I understand the importance of paying well for time worked, this proposal seems excessive for 6 months. Does this include any software/hardware as well or will there be more proposals for future funding. For instance, on finance, will you be building proprietary software or purchasing? Will you be paying an outside group to import all the data and/or hiring an accountant for quarterly reviews?

This is almost years salary for my current office staff, working full time, handling 100s of transactions a day. That’s 5 people, with a dedicated AR/AP working 40 hours a week.


I cannot speak for everyone else, my ask is based off part time work for someone with knowledge of our protocol and experience in crypto/Web3 doing similar work.

Some factors peers should consider;

  • The DAO will need to have consensus on some guided development if we hope to successfully transition to Metamorphosis and subsequently, Oasis

  • I feel many DAO members underestimate how much work goes on behind the scenes to make Sunday meetings run smoothly, push topics forward, and turning ideas into well thought out proposals

  • Again not speaking for the others, but I imagine these other individuals are walking away from other obligations, work or otherwise, to be able to take on this endeavor


I think everyone on this list has earned their spot and would be a good asset for the DAO to have running this team. Initially, I thought diddly’s compensation may have been a bit too much but considering they are doing both front-end and smart contract work, and took a smaller amount for the forge work considering the extra effort, I think the compensation is fair.


I failed to close the knowledge gap between the Forge team and the general community about our hopes for the Forge over the next 6 months. We have A LOT we want to keep working on for the protocol, but I agree it isn’t fair to say “trust us, whatever we plan is going to be great.” Here are some of the ideas we would like to pursue and deliver over the next 6 months:

  • Complete Geodes with multiple prize rarities (lootboxes)
  • Create a pathway to community created backgrounds
  • Add a new BRS-modifying slot, possibly obtained by forging
  • Add evolving pets/items
  • Core fractionalization and deflationary mechanics for cores
  • Pathway for community created schematics
  • Establish the quarterly asset sales and update the Core Framework
  • Upgrade the Forge UI as needed to include all of the above
  • And whatever other awesome ideas the community of Forge Team might have that should be prioritized over these

You can imagine that some of these projects have varying timelines. You can also imagine the DAO might not want some or any of these expansions to the Forge, so involving the DAO throughout the planning and execution process is critical - this is a ton of work. Adding a new BRS-modifying slot, for example, has many technical and UI challenges, let alone economic impact. But we can work on multiple projects at once if compensated for a defined period vs tackling stand-alone projects. Mikey can complete the economic impact of a new BRS-modifying item and then be tasked to one of the other projects or DAO operations while Oliver beautifully ideates and brings the protocol expansions to life. It would be my job to know exactly what everyone is doing, ensure accountability, keep everyone busy and deliver as much as possible to the DAO.

With multiple active projects running, we can deliver more AND put more work into the hands of the community as work will be earlier defined by the team. All of the above happens faster with a hired team than through a piecemeal approach.

All of that being said, I can redraft a potential DAO Development Force that completely removes any Forge work or protocol expansions and only includes operational tasks. The Forge team could submit individual proposals for any of the above and try to bring them through to execution individually.

Personally, I felt that the call today with discussions around the Curve reinforced that we need strong leadership, accountability, and the ability to execute as a DAO. I believe this team can bring all of those things if given the chance.


Forge is very good, I only have one key point to remind. How to get more people outside the cryptocurrency circle to forge. These people don’t even know how to use the wallet. So can Forge use a website to guide them in detail. For example, integrate credit card purchases, guide how to use wallets and switch matic networks.

diddly is building the user interface which will deploy on the main website and provide a clean, easy-to-understand experience for people familiar with RPG games. The UI work is way more difficult than we expected as V2 was significantly delayed (still not out) which delayed the UI and, thus, the release. We are very close to debuting test net and the initial UI! Hopefully this week. Make sure to give us feedback


Hey frens,

What a weekend to be away! There’s been quite a bit of development and debate over this proposal. I wanted to share with you some of my thoughts and personal experience in working with the Forge team.

In my opinion, the tasked roles extend so much further beyond what is seen on paper. Speaking from my experience with the Forge: I was initially tasked to create the graphics for the new composable assets and later to design the user interface. On the surface this seems like a straightforward job. However, that is not the case.

These roles are not just about manual labour and hours committed. They also are not siloed into individual skillsets. At this stage of development, it pays to have “jack of all trades” type people who can work together to bring forward the best result.

Speaking for myself, when I take something onto my workload, I don’t do it lightly. This is because when I do, I am all in. This commitment extends beyond the “deliverable hours” and into my personal headspace. With the forge project, not only were the actual working hours fully met and exceeded, but the actual ideation and energy spent into the vision is immeasurable. I live and breathe the project.

The Forge team was very successful, in my opinion, because we worked very holistically. MikeyJay may have been the economist and data modelling guru, but all four of us discussed at length these topics. Likewise, although I was the designated design guy, all of us participated in full discussions on design.

Now, to expand into the proposed roles…

I envision us continuing to work as a team, providing support in each other’s roles as needed. While I do believe bringing in new talent and opening positions to others is essential, I also believe in if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Why not instead take what is working and expand on it? Successful businesses don’t fire everyone every quarter and start again from scratch.

We’ve already been discussing so many exciting ideas as Dr. Wagmi has highlighted above. We want to really commit more time and energy to these potentials and spearhead discussions within the community to bring the best possible experience.

I would like to reiterate that this proposal isn’t us “taking over the DAO” or pushing any kind of agenda. Instead, its intent is to create a framework to give more power and voice to the rest of the community. As MikeyJay said, decentralisation does not mean disorganisation.

PC is forging ahead with passing off more responsibility to the DAO and I strongly believe we need structure in place in order to properly receive it.


Thank you for your thoughts, Oliver.

First of all, let me say that you’ve done an exemplary job of creating the graphics and designs for the forge release. As a professional artist/designer myself, with a wide range of experience ranging from game design/UI/illustration/animation all the way up to corporate identity, advertising and industrial design, I can say with confidence that you have shown great skill and dedication, and I have full trust in your abilities to continue working in such endeavours.

That being said, I would like to bring attention to the importance of allowing other members of the DAO the opportunity to put themselves out there too. I, for example, share your enthusiasm and sense of, “living and breathing the work.” Even without being formally hired or paid by the DAO, I have personally created numerous complete wearable sets, as well as advocated for the inclusion of community designed assets from the beginning (alongside you). I was one of the first people to suggest the concept of Vanity Skins for wearables, an idea that I believe The Forge has expanding on elegantly. I have also created pre-FAKE-age Gotchi art at a time where no monetization strategies for such work existed. Currently, I have completed the design of STRATEGOTCHI, a game which I singlehandedly conceptualized, designed, and created all relevant graphics for. I dedicated countless hours of personal time to acheive this, because like you, I am passionate about the work that drives me, and I give myself to it fully.

Besides this I have also been involved in helping other community members grow their own personal projects and mentored multiple community members, helping them expand their skills and flourish as community artists. For these reasons, I would like the opportunity to put my name and resume forward for consideration as Design Lead for the DAO as well. I have all the necessary skill sets required for the job as well as the time to dedicate myself to it fully.

While I reiterate that the Forge team has done an amazing job, I believe that to be decentralized we should allow others like myself, who are capable and willing to take on such roles to be considered as well.


I think this is too expensive for DAO

Let’s see how much forge will bring before paying a California level of salaries to one group


and even if we fund such a group don’t we need to have competition for such attractive positions?


I ask a (solidity) tech lead friend on his forge work and their budget. He said it is too expensive and there is nothing complicated. Maybe diddly can present his other work, to make sure he has enough experience for a such responsible and highly payed position

With UI… I requested 10k to for fireball UI like 3 month ago, to cover even more features from aavegotchi protocol (which can include the forge), hear nothing about it since

Many people requested even smaller amounts to create smaller projects for the DAO.

How about we work more on transparency, accountability and do more smaller projects first, before we sign such an expensive deal


I think there are a few separate issues. I like the Forge. I support it. But there’s NO REASON TO RUSH IT-WE DON’T EVEN HAVE A GAME LOL. 1. I think the Forge Team should be separate from the Leadership team. Devwork should be paid by PC for game mechanic core stuff. PC should be funding the Forge efforts imho unless the DAO gets ALL the cheese from that! 2. The pay is too much for a product we don’t even know will work with the game…Can we see THAT or the actual product vs a spreadsheet of algorithms (that y’all will probably vote to change later LOL)? 3. The five already chosen are all well liked, but are they the best fit for the job? I would want to add Laggin in there somewhere-he has produced-and doesn’t whine about compensation or accolades or time spent. 4. I want to know time commitments for the roles. I don’t think we should pay a bunch of people full salaries as if we’re PC. Because we’re not. Also, the people applying for these “full time roles” should be FULL time and that does not include another 40 hour a week job. 5. If Yanik has done legwork and checked on the complexity of something like this and he says it is too high priced, I believe him and would like to see salary data on the roles for similar projects. It matters if people are competent in these roles…and we shouldn’t elect people based on popularity. 6. I worry about the deliverables and the measurability of success. Just what are we getting from the Chair for $75k? I think we should know the deliverables before we set a price or a person for all.
Seems several of those items could be accomplished by the community. Set a channel in discord for creating a DAO roadmap and a separate channel for DAO mission and values. The community WANTS to add and contribute. But the opportunities seem limited to others in the community and it’s like a 7th grade popularity contest. She doesn’t even go here! Several people will jump in and work on an outline…and it will be visible to everyone! The operational and finance metrics I do feel we need Mikey Jay for-so that’s the only green light for me. And Hardkor’s charts are off the chain. I think we need to foster community vs exclusivity to get more resources out of our already pretty damn cool team.


It’s more of the popular kids versus the stoner’s, 90’s style. And this DAO has way too much testosterone to be compared to girls!

Nothing against, Mikey but I do feel as if the operations and finances should be separated. I would want a bit more checks and balance in those departments. I can understand it IF this is for the initial phase of development, but hopefully would be filled by 2 individuals in the future.

I just want a little bit more clarity on what we will get for those salaries. The word “think tank” was used too many times for comfort Sunday… Are we treating them like contract workers; IE. we pay them a set amount and they use it toward whatever resources they need to accomplish the job, including hiring help with their salary and not asking for more funding, or will 7.4% turn into 12% before the 6 months are over.

I guess many frens have concerns that results of the team won’t match the budget. It can be easily mitigated by changing the compensation model to smaller fixed amounts, but added bonuses for certain KPI achieved by the team or individuals.